I’m prepping the PR for 5.17.0. Please provide feedback on the JIRA. Thanks!
> On Feb 24, 2021, at 11:16 AM, Havret <h4v...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Any update on this? I've just seen that Victor Romero archived his > unofficial docker image. :( > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 4:57 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I'm following up on that JIRA ticket. >> >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:57 AM Clebert Suconic >> <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Matt, I thought you already had some information about changes >>> on Infra. I had misunderstood you. >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:33 AM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Clebert- >>>> >>>> I do not have all the info yet, INFRA has assigned the ticket but not >> started working on it =) >>>> >>>> -Matt >>>> >>>>> On Feb 19, 2021, at 9:25 AM, Clebert Suconic < >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I tried to follow the JIRA on Infra and I did not see much >> information about it. >>>>> >>>>> What's the procedure to upload images? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The only thing I saw was this JIRA: But it seemed you would be >>>>> uploading images manually? >>>>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21430 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Isn't there an official way to provide the images? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In artemis we have a docker module where you would build the binaries >>>>> and create the image. We would just need to add that to a Jenkins >>>>> build and produce an image whenever a tag is created. >>>>> I suppose ActiveMQ branch would do the same... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How this is supposed to work? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> thank you >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:13 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> The initial features list and notes in the JIRA reflect this >> approach. I’ll start on the module and push a PR this weekend. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Matt >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree, I think it’s the most convenient approach. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For instance, at Karaf, I maintain a Dockerfile as part of the >> codebase: https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker < >> https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As part of a Karaf release, I’m pushing Karaf docker image. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, anyone can start from the Karaf Dockerfile to create >> their own one (we also provide a goal on the karaf-maven-plugin to do so). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think ActiveMQ (at least classic) should just provide a >> Dockerfile (or a set) and push "official" docker images. But still letting >> people to create their own. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> JB >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Le 17 févr. 2021 à 19:51, Hossack, Etienne >> <ehoss...@amazon.com.INVALID> a écrit : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> Following this discussion with interest, since I greatly enjoy >> the portability and consistency that Docker provides. >>>>>>>> I have some questions about the Dockerfile linked above that >> might be best served in a code review, but a more holistic question I >> wanted to ask: >>>>>>>> Does ActiveMQ need to publish the Dockerfile? >>>>>>>> In my opinion, simply defining the image then documenting its >> location (README, website) and how to use it would add value to many >> consumers. >>>>>>>> That way: >>>>>>>> * The Dockerfile code can live within the ActiveMQ repository and >> be close to the code >>>>>>>> * Anyone who wishes to consume the dockerfile can (Apache 2.0 >> license) through their own build process >>>>>>>> * The ActiveMQ community does not need to maintain any additional >> infrastructure, release process, repositories, dependencies. >>>>>>>> * The Dockerfile can and should be independent of particular >> binaries < >> https://docs.docker.com/develop/develop-images/dockerfile_best-practices/#env> >> whenever possible, but even if not, this way each active branch would be >> the source of truth for a functioning Dockerfile (can build and run tests >> on the version), and no incremental versions would have to be published. >>>>>>>> I think we could gain lots of value for little investment this >> way. What do you think? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Étienne >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> P.S. should I add the questions on the JIRA ticket as well? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Étienne Hossack >>>>>>>> Software Development Engineer, Amazon MQ >>>>>>>> email: ehoss...@amazon.com <mailto:ehoss...@amazon.com> >>>>>>>> phone: +1-778-945-8287 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Clebert Suconic < >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com <mailto:clebert.suco...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. >> Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender >> and know the content is safe. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It would be nice to do the same with Artemis... we already have >> scripts to >>>>>>>>> build the images as part of the build.. we just don't have the >> builds yet. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:36 AM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) < >>>>>>>>> jenki...@nationwide.com <mailto:jenki...@nationwide.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Quick introduction: My name is Rod. I work with Chuck. I am >> stepping in >>>>>>>>>> while he is out. I am the coworker who does the TomEE images. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have a question on the tarballs on https://archive.apache.org >> <https://archive.apache.org/> and >>>>>>>>>> https://repo1.maven.org <https://repo1.maven.org/>. I noticed >> that the images are not the same SHA >>>>>>>>>> and not the same size. Is there a reason for that? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> BTW, the Dockerfile is mostly complete, >>>>>>>>>> >> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile >> < >> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile >>> . >>>>>>>>>> I think the only thing left was getting the maven download to >> work as the >>>>>>>>>> fallback to the other repos. I can still make that work, but I >> thought it >>>>>>>>>> was strange to see a difference in the sizes of the files. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is what we are proposing. I am going to start on the >> other options >>>>>>>>>> later today. We would be happy for any feedback. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Rod. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Shank, Charles R" <shan...@nationwide.com <mailto: >> shan...@nationwide.com>> >>>>>>>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 8:49 AM >>>>>>>>>> *To: *Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto: >> j...@nanthrax.net>>, Matt Pavlovich < >>>>>>>>>> mattr...@gmail.com <mailto:mattr...@gmail.com>>, " >> dev@activemq.apache.org <mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org>" < >> dev@activemq.apache.org <mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org>> >>>>>>>>>> *Cc: *"Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <jenki...@nationwide.com >> <mailto:jenki...@nationwide.com>> >>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Official Docker Image for ActiveMQ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jean, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree we should make this its own issue and open up the >> discussion to >>>>>>>>>> the ActiveMQ community >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Currently, we are working on the following repository to >> provide generic >>>>>>>>>> images available to the ActiveMQ community. You can follow our >> progress >>>>>>>>>> here: *https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq < >> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq> >>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq < >> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq>>* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Because the needs of the community are varied, we recommend >> making >>>>>>>>>> multiple versions of ActiveMQ classic and Artemis. The repos >> also will be >>>>>>>>>> created to include OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. We also recommend >> leaving >>>>>>>>>> room for other operating systems other than Debian and multiple >> versions of >>>>>>>>>> JDK within both OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Given the number of options, we are not sure how we would go >> about using a >>>>>>>>>> module to maintain the dockerfiles, but would be open to it. >> Once we get >>>>>>>>>> our dockerimages complete, we can discuss how they are >> maintained going >>>>>>>>>> forward. We will also investigate with the folks at >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/docker-library < >> https://github.com/docker-library> to see what is required to get our >>>>>>>>>> images listed as the official images. I have a coworker that is >>>>>>>>>> responsible for the TomEE official images and has some contacts >> there. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We would like to get the communities thoughts and input on this >> course of >>>>>>>>>> action. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Chuck Shank >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [image: cid:image001.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0 >> <cid:image001.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0>] >>>>>>>>>> [image: cid:image002.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0 >> <cid:image002.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0>] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Clebert Suconic >> >> >> >> -- >> Clebert Suconic >>
